OK, I'm Now Post-Trib (you convinced me)

[BrianT]

Originally posted by SheEagle9/11:
Anyway, I am trying to find out why someone who claims to be post-trib is FOR the Road Map since the assertion has been made that since I am pre-trib, that is why I am against it.

Just a side-note: if you are for or against something because of your view, that doesn't necessarily mean someone with an opposite view has the opposite opinion about that something. For example, if you are against legalizing marijuana because you are a Christian, that doesn't necessarily mean non-Christians are by default for it. Some non-Christians are for it, some are against it (for different reasons than you may be), and some are indifferent.

Thus, many posttribbers may not respond to your question.

Even though I am posttrib (and understand your question better now), your question isn't really directed at me.

[ June 14, 2003, 05:09 PM: Message edited by: BrianT ]

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by church mouse guy:
What you are saying is logical, and I do not want to confront your ideas in any sense.

My understanding of the Great Tribulation is that there will be a period of peace and safety. Since we are not in that period yet, we must not be in the Great Tribulation yet, right?

The period of peace and safety would have to come before the great tribulation. I'm not so sure there is such a period, or if there is one, if it is as idyllic as some tend to describe it. I personally think that Ezekiel 38, which talks about peace and safety in terms of unwalled villages, takes place at the end of the millenium. So I think that's one place where people get the prophetic views mixed up.

That aside, the event that clearly ushers in the great tribulation is when the abomination of desolation is set up and man of sin is revealed. Once the great tribulation begins it sure doesn't sound like peace and safety to me -- it sounds like people better get outta town as fast as possible.

Matthew 24:15 "Therefore when you see the "abomination of desolation,' spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place" (whoever reads, let him understand), 16 "then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. [...] 21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be.

(emphasis mine, of course)

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by SheEagle9/11:
Anyway, I am trying to find out why someone who claims to be post-trib is FOR the Road Map since the assertion has been made that since I am pre-trib, that is why I am against it.

Aha! Now I understand WHY you are asking the question. What I don't understand is why anyone would accuse you of being against the road map because you're pre-trib. That makes as little sense to me as assuming the majority of post-tribbers must be for the road map because they're post-trib.

I simply don't see the connection. I figure God is fully capable of executing His plan and precisely on His time schedule whether the road map succeeds or fails. So I'm against it on principle, and however that fits into the great tribulation is irrelevant.

 

[church mouse guy]

Eschatology is not exactly the issue behind the criticism. It is not that one is pre-trib, mid-trib, or post-trib in my opinion. The real issue is replacement theology. If you think that Jews because of disobedience have been replaced by Christians in God's promises, then you might be saying that someone who believes that God's promises to the Jews are eternal is someone against the road map. The problem with the road map, or Oslo leftovers microwaved, is that it has no mechanism to enforce Arab compliance.

 

[LadyEagle]

The real issue is replacement theology.

Ah ha! Church mouse guy, methinks you hit the right nail on the head!!!! That explains everything!!!

Because within my understanding of all three views: pre-trib, mid-trib, and post-trib, I couldn't figure out how some one could be FOR the Road Map....unless.... that certain someone believes in Replacement Theology (which originated with Augustine? / RCC? ).

The puzzle has been solved! Throwing up tribulation views is merely a smokescreen/decoy for the REAL reason!!!!

Thanks for solving the mystery!

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by SheEagle9/11:
I couldn't figure out how some one could be FOR the Road Map....unless.... that certain someone believes in Replacement Theology.

Very simple. One who wants to see the Israelis and Palestinians live in peace, especially for the children's sake, would want to see the Road Map for Peace be blessed with great success by God, irregardless of one's eschatological viewpoint. Most people who have an opinion on the Road Map for Peace worldwide don't even have an eschatological viewpoint.

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by church mouse guy:
The real issue is replacement theology.

Replacement theology is incorrect. The church has not replaced Israel. Rather, Gentiles and Jews are included in the church.

 

[LadyEagle]

Most people who have an opinion on the Road Map for Peace worldwide don't even have an eschatological viewpoint.

Perhaps, but that doesn't mean they aren't anti-Semitic (using the word in the historical sense which meant anti-Jews, not the current politically correct sense which includes Arabs).

If this Road Map is successful, and if one believes Biblical prophecy as to who the one person is who is going to bring this about over there, well, you do realize, of course, what this suggests?

So, let me see if I have this straight: You are undecided where you stand, post-trib, mid-trib, but definitely not pre-trib, and you are FOR the Road Map but you see no contradiction between your eschatological viewpoint and being PRO-Road Map? And, you believe peace can be made with terrorists who have stated they want to blow every Jew into pieces and drive them into the Sea? I'm in absolute astonishment, I must say! In fact, I'm downright appalled! (Lord, help him see the light! Maybe Ann Coulter can get through to him! LOL!

)

 

[LadyEagle]

Originally posted by KenH: (on another thread)

Why do premillennial dispensationals take such umbrage when anyone dares to debate them on eschatology? What kind of mindset do these people have that causes them to cast slander on fellow Christians by calling them anti-Semtic over the interpretation of what anyone with a lick of sense knows is highly symbolic Bible language? I find it amazing that they appear to believe that just about every Christian was anti-Semitic prior to 1830, except for perhaps a weirdo like Montanus.

Although in listening to Kim Riddlebarger talk about his youth as a premillennial dispensationalist on the "Bible Answer Man" radio show he admitted that he was so caught up in dispensationalism to the point where he questioned whether non-dispensationalists were saved. That mindset is every bit as awful as the ultra-conservative members of the Church of Christ who believe that only members of their denomination will be saved.

Now, it's highly symbolic Bible language.

 

[church mouse guy]

KenH, if you had continued quoting what I said I said that replacement theology is Christians took the place of Jews. You then replied that both Jews and Gentiles were Christians, so that was not correct. That is a twisting of the facts because I never defined Christians because it goes without saying that some physical Jews are now Christians. (It seems to me that fact that you allude to physical Jews suggest that you recognize that there are still physical Jews.) But the point still stands that the major difference is replacement theology.

By the way, you should abandon CRI. They have been abandoned by Walter Martin's friends and family. This is referenced at www.waltermartin.org/cri.html

 

[Matt Black]

Originally posted by SheEagle9/11:

And, you believe peace can be made with terrorists who have stated they want to blow every Jew into pieces and drive them into the Sea? I'm in absolute astonishment, I must say! In fact, I'm downright appalled! (Lord, help him see the light! Maybe Ann Coulter can get through to him! LOL!

)

Can you tell me which terrorists blew up the KIng David Hotel? And how Menachem Begin began his political career.

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

[LadyEagle]

Matt, that's the same tired argument you brought up in another thread a few weeks ago. Your side still hasn't explained how your acceptance of the Road Map fits into your eschatology.

However, since it looks like you believe in Replacement Theology, that explains everything.

 

[Matt Black]

Yes, and you didn't answer it then either. One is left wondering why?

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

[LadyEagle]

Because it has nothing to do with the current situation. Nada.

 

[Matt Black]

It has everything to do with the curent situation. It is morally inconsistent to condemn Arab terrorism and not do the same wih Israeli/ Jewish terrorism. If you are unwilling to comdemn the latter, you ae in no position to condemn the former.

So...I'm still waiting

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

[LadyEagle]

Matt Black, that is a foul smelling mackerel designed to abort this thread.

But if you want to start another thread comparing ONE event in the past with multiple events by homicide bombers, feel free to start a new thread.

Meanwhile, I am waiting for some good Scriptures to defend the reasons why Post-Tribs are for the Road Map according to Scripture. So far, all I've seen are a threw scraps of Replacement Theology thrown into the mix.

Not convincing, not even the same topic. (sigh)

So, the conclusion one must draw is the issue isn't eschatology. It is Replacement Theology via Augustine, pure & simple. Alas. I thought there would be a real challenge. I shall pick up my gauntlet & depart....unless something juicy and unpredictable is tossed into the ring.

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by church mouse guy:
1) But the point still stands that the major difference is replacement theology.

2)By the way, you should abandon CRI.

1)As I stated, I do not believe in Replacement Theology. Period.

2)I have nothing to do with CRI and know nothing about CRI. If this has to do with the "Bible Answer Man" radio show with Kim Riddlebarger as the guest, my only interest was in those two shows. Beyond that, as I said, I know nothing about CRI.

 

[LadyEagle]

Foul smelling mackerel, a.k.a., red herring! LOL!

 

[KenH]

Matt,

You may have noticed as I have that it appears that dispensational premillennialists do not defend their position. It appears that they operate under the assumption, de facto, that their position is correct and anyone who disagrees is a liberal and anti-Semitic and believes in Replacement Theology. Apparently, they see those as the only two options in discussing eschatology.

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by SheEagle9/11:
Now, it's highly symbolic Bible language.

Anyone with knowledge about apocalyptic literature knows it is composed of symbols. So what's the point of your statement?